According to Sunstein, global climate change is primarily the fault of U.S. environmental behavior and can, therefore, be used as a mechanism to redistribute the country's wealth.

The argument bears striking resemblance to comments made by Obama's former environmental adviser, Van Jones. WND reported Jones used a major environmental convention to argue for spreading America's wealth.

Now WND has learned Sunstein made similar, more extensive arguments.

The Obama czar penned a 2007 University of Chicago Law School paper – obtained and reviewed by WND – in which he debated whether America should pay "justice" to the world by entering into a compensation agreement that would be a net financial loss for the U.S.

Sunstein heavily leans on the side of such an agreement, particularly a worldwide carbon tax that would heavily tariff the U.S.

(Story continues below)

A prominent theme throughout Sunstein's 39-page paper, entitled "Climate Change Justice," maintains U.S. wealth should be redistributed to poorer nations. He uses terms such as "distributive justice" several times. The paper was written with fellow attorney Eric A. Posner

"It is even possible that desirable redistribution is more likely to occur through climate change policy than otherwise, or to be accomplished more effectively through climate policy than through direct foreign aid," wrote Sunstein.

He posited: "We agree that if the United States does spend a great deal on emissions reductions as part of an international agreement, and if the agreement does give particular help to disadvantaged people, considerations of distributive justice support its action, even if better redistributive mechanisms are imaginable.

"If the United States agrees to participate in a climate change agreement on terms that are not in the nation's interest, but that help the world as a whole, there would be no reason for complaint, certainly if such participation is more helpful to poor nations than conventional foreign-aid alternatives," he wrote.

Sunstein maintains: "If we care about social welfare, we should approve of a situation in which a wealthy nation is willing to engage in a degree of self-sacrifice when the world benefits more than that nation loses."

Sunstein is not the only Obama czar to make such an argument. Jones made similar remarks before he resigned earlier this month after WND exposed he is an admitted radical communist.

Two weeks before Jones started his White House job in March, he delivered the keynote address at Power Shift '09, billed as the largest youth summit on climate change in history. A reported 12,000 young people were at the D.C. Convention Center for the event.

During his speech, available on YouTube, Jones used terms such as "eco-apartheid" and "green for some," and preached about spreading the wealth while positing a call to "change the whole system."

In one section of his 29-minute speech, Jones referenced "our Native American brothers and sisters" who, he claimed, were "pushed," "bullied," "mistreated" and "shoved into all the land that we didn't want."

"Guess what?" Jones continued. "Give them the wealth! Give them then wealth! No justice on stolen land ... we owe them a debt."

"We have to create a green economy, that's true, that's true. But we have to create a green economy that Dr. King would be proud of," Jones exclaimed.

This is craziness! I've gotten the sense that Obama wants to put everyone on the same playing field economically which includes healthcare to make up for past injustices done to certain groups of Americans. If that's the case then let's start from the top on down. Let the President and Congress get whatever healthcare they are proposing for us and let us set their salaries and approve their raises by the job they do for us (which is usually piss poor!)

These two nut jobs (the one that just left and this new one) just reconfirm my feelings about some of President Obama's agenda except I didn't realize it extended to bankrupting America to help poor nations and not just the poor in our nation.

From WND article above
In one section of his 29-minute speech, Jones referenced "our Native American brothers and sisters" who, he claimed, were "pushed," "bullied," "mistreated" and "shoved into all the land that we didn't want."

Sunstein maintains: "If we care about social welfare, we should approve of a situation in which a wealthy nation is willing to engage in a degree of self-sacrifice when the world benefits more than that nation loses."

That's kind of oversimplifying the situation; but I think just about every single American alive today would agree that what happened to the Native Americans was wrong. However, many of the Native American tribes were far from being innocent victims. Many of them were pretty brutal and regularly attacked, raped and pillaged their neighboring tribes.

Let's not forget that there were many examples of Native Americans and early settlers working together and getting along peacefully as well.

It's a dark period of American history, but nothing that any American alive today needs to be punished for. We don't go after the children of Nazis, so why are we, as Americans, being held accountable for actions committed hundreds of years ago? That's not justice.

That's kind of oversimplifying the situation; but I think just about every single American alive today would agree that what happened to the Native Americans was wrong. However, many of the Native American tribes were far from being innocent victims. Many of them were pretty brutal and regularly attacked, raped and pillaged their neighboring tribes.

Let's not forget that there were many examples of Native Americans and early settlers working together and getting along peacefully as well.

It's a dark period of American history, but nothing that any American alive today needs to be punished for. We don't go after the children of Nazis, so why are we, as Americans, being held accountable for actions committed hundreds of years ago? That's not justice.